Journal of Foodservice Business Research

ISSN: 1537-8020 (Print) 1537-8039 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wfbr20

Loyalty toward online food delivery service: the

role of e-service quality and food quality

Dwi Suhartanto, Mohd Helmi Ali, Kim Hua Tan, Fauziyah Sjahroeddin &
Lusianus Kusdibyo

To cite this article: Dwi Suhartanto, Mohd Helmi Ali, Kim Hua Tan, Fauziyah Sjahroeddin &
Lusianus Kusdibyo (2019) Loyalty toward online food delivery service: the role of e-service
quality and food quality, Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 22:1, 81-97, DOI:
10.1080/15378020.2018.1546076

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2018.1546076

Published online: 24 Nov 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3844

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 21 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wfbr20
JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH
2019, VOL. 22, NO. 1, 81–97
https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2018.1546076

Loyalty toward online food delivery service: the role of

e-service quality and food quality
Dwi Suhartantoa, Mohd Helmi Alib, Kim Hua Tanc, Fauziyah Sjahroeddina
and Lusianus Kusdibyoa
a
Department of Business Administration, Bandung State Polytechnic, Bandung, Indonesia; bSchool of
Management, Faculty of Economics and Management, National University of Malaysia, Malaysia; cOperations
Management and Information Systems, Nottingham University Business School, Jubilee Campus, Nottingham, UK

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
This study assesses the direct influence of food quality and e-service E-service quality; food
quality on customer loyalty toward online food delivery (OFD) service quality; loyalty; online food
and its indirect influence through the mediation of customer satisfaction delivery service
and perceived value. This study uses a survey of 405 OFD service custo-
mers from Bandung, Indonesia. By applying variance-based partial least
squares to evaluate the proposed model, this study confirms the direct
effect of food quality on online loyalty, but not e-service quality. Further,
this study discloses the partial mediation role of customer satisfaction and
perceived value on the relationship between both food quality and
e-service quality on online loyalty toward OFD services.

Introduction
The progress in internet technology which facilitates the e-commerce activities has altered
the behavior of both consumers and firms. The availability of e-commerce platforms as
a shopping medium enables customers to shop conveniently, compare products and prices
effectively, and arrange the delivery of the product immediately (Chang, Chou, & Lo,
2014; Yeo, Goh, & Rezaei, 2017). In the restaurant context, the availability of online
technology enables customer to order the food through restaurant websites or via online
food delivery services such as Eat24, GrabFood, and GoFood. For the restaurant industry,
the availability of online delivery service technology enables the industry, which is in
a saturated market, to improve order accuracy, increase productivity, and enhance custo-
mer relationship (Kimes, 2011), and extend their market (Ng, Wong, & Chong, 2017; Yeo
et al., 2017). Among online shopping, recent development shows that food has become
one of the most preferred shopping and is growing rapidly, 12% per year (Chang et al.,
2014). This development is an opportunity as well as a challenge for restaurants, as it
creates a fierce competition. In this challenging environment, having loyal customers is
imperative for online business firms (Pee, Jiang, & Klein, 2018).
The importance of customer loyalty, as well as its determinants, is well discussed in the
literature. Among the loyalty drivers, literature tends to agree that quality of product or
services, perceived value, and customer satisfaction are building blocks of loyalty (Wirtz &
Lovelock, 2016). However, although a plethora of researches on loyalty have been

CONTACT Dwi Suhartanto dwi.suhartanto@polban.ac.id Department of Business Administration, Bandung State

Polytechnic, Bandung, Indonesia
© 2018 Taylor & Francis
82 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

conducted in various industries, scholars (Abou-Shouk & Khalifa, 2017; Caruana & Ewing,
2010) believe that the formation of customer loyalty is still not thoroughly understood. In
addition, the result of studies in one industry will be difficult to generalize to other
industries due to characteristic differences; thus, scholars recommend examining loyalty
formation in other new industry sectors (Gursoy, Chen, & Chi, 2014). Although the OFD
service business is currently flourishing and promising in the future (Kedah, Ismail,
Haque, & Ahmed, 2015; Yeo et al., 2017), surprisingly, literature seems to be silent in
understanding what drives customer loyalty toward OFD services.
Studies in the restaurant context (Kedah et al., 2015; Yeo et al., 2017) reported that the
customer experience is substantially affected by food quality and e-service quality. Despite
the importance of both qualities, literature seems to be relatively absent in addressing the
simultaneous effect of those qualities on customer online loyalty, especially in the OFD
services environment. Driven by this research gap, this study examines how e-service
quality as well as food quality impacts on loyalty toward OFD services. More specifically,
this study proposes to evaluate: (1) the direct influence of e-service quality and food
quality on online loyalty and (2) the indirect influence through perceived value and
customer satisfaction mediation role. Conducting such a study will provide an avenue
for restaurateurs to develop more effective strategies to target their market and will extend
the existing consumer loyalty knowledge from the perspective of the OFD services.
A report (Statista, 2018) shows that even with a penetration of only 50.4%, the absolute
number of Indonesians using these services is enormous, given that there are 132.7 million
internet users in Indonesia. Further, the report reveals that the Indonesian segment for food
delivery market is paramount as the value of transactions is US$ 968 Million in 2018 and is
expected to grow at 13% per annum. The players of the OFD business in Indonesia are not only
international fast-food restaurants such as McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Chicken, which
operate their own delivery services but also many small and medium casual dining and fast-food
restaurants which use food delivery service intermediaries such GoFood and GrabFood. This
indication clearly shows an intense competition in the Indonesian OFD service industry.
Therefore, by the value of the market alone, it is reasonable to study online loyalty toward
OFD services in the Indonesian market.

Theoretical framework and hypotheses development

Online loyalty
In a competitive and challenging business environment, such as in the restaurant industry,
having customer satisfaction on its own is not enough to ensure business survival, let alone to
increase business success (Ha & Jang, 2010). The key for survival and flourishing in this
competitive environment is through having loyal clients. Loyalty is “a deeply held commit-
ment to repurchase or re-patronize a preferred product or service consistently in the future
despite situational influences and marketing efforts” (Oliver, 1999, p. 34). Loyalty toward
a product or service comprises of brand loyalty, vendor loyalty, service loyalty, and retail
loyalty. Online loyalty or e-loyalty widens conventional loyalty by involving online technology
as the mediation of the relationship between customers and the firm. Scholars (Abou-Shouk &
Khalifa, 2017; Kim, Jin, & Swinney, 2009; Pee et al., 2018) commonly describe online loyalty as
the customers’ loyalty toward the website, indicating with customer intention to revisit the
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 83

website and to make a transaction and to recommend the website to others. This study focuses
on online food delivery service. Thus, online loyalty toward OFDs is described as the
commitment of the customers toward the online food delivery service that results in repurch-
ase and customer positive behaviors toward the OFD service providers.
Literature suggests that loyal customers increase the firm’s profit through their enduring
commitment toward the firm and enable the firm to lower costs in recruiting new clients
(Reichheld, Markey, & Hopton, 2000). Further studies (Kim et al., 2009; Suhartanto, Chen,
Mohi, & Sosianika, 2018) reveal that loyal customers tend to purchase more than newly
acquired customers, pay premium prices, refer new customers to the firm, and lessen operat-
ing costs. Thus, having online loyal customers can accelerate profit growth although the
expenditure of developing online loyalty is bigger than that of traditional loyalty (Kim et al.,
2009). Fandos and Flavián (2006) suggest that to convert a first-time customer to a loyal
customer, managers need to identify customer expectations and provide a unique product and
service that exceed their customers’ expectations. Thus, the need for food purchased through
OFD services is based on a combination of online processing, food preparation, and prompt
delivery service (Kedah et al., 2015; Yeo et al., 2017) and requires that the food and its services
are well designed and exceeds the customer’s expectation.
Three approaches are used to evaluate customer loyalty toward a product or service. First,
loyalty is conceptualized as behavior. Using this behavioral approach, a loyal consumer is one
who systematically purchases the product or services within a certain period (Suhartanto et al.,
2018). In the OFD setting, a loyal customer according to this approach is one who orders the food
regularly, either directly through the restaurant website or through restaurant intermediate
websites. Second, loyalty is conceptualized as an emotional expression of customer intention
to repurchase and recommend (Gursoy et al., 2014). Due to the behavioral and attitudinal
weaknesses, experts (Gursoy et al., 2014) recommend a third approach, a combination of the
behavioral and psychological, known as composite loyalty. The composite approach suggests
that customer’s loyalty toward OFD services is measured by their online purchasing and
tendency to re-purchase and to recommend the OFD firm to others. This approach enables
the researcher to understand not only current customer loyalty behavior but also future customer
loyalty behavior. Thus, this study treats customer loyalty toward OFD services as composite
loyalty.

E-service quality
The most commonly cited definition of e-service quality is “the extent to which a website
facilitates efficient and effective shopping, purchasing, and delivery of products and services”
proposed by Zeithaml and colleagues (2002, p. 363). The Zeithaml and colleagues description
denotes that e-services quality is the customers’ inclusive assessment of the electronic services
offerings. Customers expect quality service of websites when making online purchases (Caruana
& Ewing, 2010). Thus, the quality of websites is crucial for the firms to market their products and
services. This is particularly important in online business such as OFD services, where the
interaction between the firms and their customers is only through online devices. Jeon and Jeong
(2017) suggest that upholding the website quality is imperative to retain customers, persuade
them to revisit the web, and finally to secure their loyalty. Consequently, keeping a high-quality
website is essential for the success of online businesses (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Malhotra,
2005; Pee et al., 2018).
84 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

For online businesses, an innovative and well-developed website is equal to an excel-

lent distribution channel in conventional business. Studies on e-service quality mainly
focus on two issues, the dimensionality and its antecedents and consequences. An
important study on e-service quality dimensionality was conducted by Parasuraman and
colleagues (2005) resulting in an e-service quality measurement scale called the ES-QUAL,
consisting of four dimensions: system availability, efficiency, privacy, and fulfillment.
Subsequently, researchers (Bressolles, Durrieu, & Senecal, 2014; Chang, Wang, & Yang,
2009; Mihajlović, 2017) offer additional dimensionality models consisting of varied
dimensions. In terms of the e-service quality consequences, studies have progressively
taken into account the link between customer interaction with the website and their
subsequent behaviors. Most previous studies suggest that customer e-loyalty is determined
by customer experience with the e-service quality (Chang et al., 2014; Jeon & Jeong, 2017;
Kedah et al., 2015; Mihajlović, 2017; Pee et al., 2018). Thus, in the OFD context, the
following hypothesis is formulated.

H1: E-service quality positively influences customer loyalty toward OFD services

Food quality
The term food quality refers to an overall performance of food to fulfill customer need and
is considered an important element of the customer experience with the restaurant (Ha &
Jang, 2010; Sulek & Hensley, 2004). Although past studies emphasize the importance of
food quality, in terms of what attributes constitute food quality, past studies have no
consensus as to its constituent aspects. Ha and Jang (2010) use food attributes of taste,
nutrition, and variety to assess the influence of customers experience with food on their
satisfaction as well as their intention to return to the restaurant. Liu, Lee, and Hung (2017)
utilize the menu, presentation, size, and variety as indicators of the quality of restaurant
food. Further, Sulek and Hensley (2004) state that appeal, safety, and dietary factor are the
common characteristics customers use to determine the quality of food. Other scholars
(Namkung & Jang, 2007) propose variety of the menu, food presentation, healthiness,
taste, freshness, and food temperature to evaluate food quality. Along with service quality,
the quality of food is regarded as basic element that influences customers’ experience with
the restaurant (Ha & Jang, 2010; Liu et al., 2017; Namkung & Jang, 2007).
Due to its important role, along with other variables, food quality has been empirically
examined in various restaurant studies. Liu and colleagues (2017) confirm that customers’
restaurant choice is mainly dictated by the food quality factor. In casual dining restau-
rants, Mattila (2001) suggests that the quality of food is a major determinant of customer
loyalty. Compared to service quality and restaurant environment, Sulek and Hensley
(2004) report that satisfaction with the restaurant is influenced mainly by the quality of
food. Another study to explore customer behavior in the restaurant environment
(Namkung & Jang, 2007) reports the significant role of food quality in affecting satisfac-
tion and intention to purchase and to recommend the restaurant (indicators of customer
loyalty). Although it is the fundamental element for restaurants, none of the studies in the
OFD context have assessed food quality as the determinant of customer post-purchase
behavior. Referring to past studies, it is logical to assume that food quality will impact on
customer loyalty toward the OFD services.
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 85

H2: Food quality positively influences loyalty toward OFD services

Literature in restaurant studies has also reported the link between food quality, service
quality, and e-service quality (Ha & Jang, 2010; Kedah et al., 2015); however, none of the
past studies have examined the impact of e-service quality on food quality. The Spillover
theory postulates that experience within a particular life area will leak to other areas of life
(Sirgy, Efraty, Siegel, & Lee, 2001). Based on this theory, a customer’s experiences in one
part of their consumption process could affect his or her experience in the other parts of
the consumption process. Testing in the hospitality sector, Kim, Woo, Uysal, and Kwon
(2018) report the applicability of this theory in explaining the effects of employee percep-
tion on corporate social responsibility on job satisfaction and overall quality of life.
Another study reports the applicability of this theory to assess the relationship between
tourist behaviors in both their home and holiday environments (Sthapit & Björk, 2017). In
the OFD services industry, it is expected that the customers’ experience with online service
will spillover and affect their feelings toward the food purchased. The purchasing and
delivering process comes first, prior to the customers’ receipt and consumption of the
food. Thus, it is suggested that the customer experience with the quality of e-service will
affect the customer experience with the food.

H3: E-service quality positively influences food quality

The mediation role of perceived value

The term perceived value is associated with a relative comparison between benefits and
sacrifices associated with the product or service offering. The conceptual basis of perceived
value is equity theory which postulates the proportion between the provider’s outcome
and the consumer’s input (García-Fernández et al., 2018). Customers feel treated fairly if
they feel that the proportion between their sacrifices and experiences with the product or
services is equivalent (Chang et al., 2009). The perceive value’s importance in online
business is because customers can easily compare product features and prices. Caruana
and Ewing (2010) maintain that the cost of searching in online market places is low,
causing the online firms to have better competitive prices. This cost reduction increases
the probability that the customers will compare the prices and the benefits offered by the
product or services they buy. The relationship between the customers and the e-retailer is
stronger if the customers perceive that they gain higher value for their scarification in both
monetary terms as well as the non-monetary aspects (Anderson & Srinivasan, 2003).
Further, research also strongly provides evidence of the influence of e-service quality on
perceived value (Caruana & Ewing, 2010; Chang et al., 2009; Jeon & Jeong, 2017). This
discussion suggests that the link between e-service quality and online loyalty is interme-
diated by perceived value. Thus, the following hypotheses are formulated.

H4: The relationship between e-service quality and loyalty toward OFD service is
mediated by perceived value

H5: The relationship between food quality and loyalty toward OFD service is mediated
by perceived value
86 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

The mediation role of customer satisfaction

Satisfaction is a subjective assessment of product performance associated with customer
prior expectation (Suhartanto, Brien, Sumarjan, & Wibisono, 2018). Oliver (1999) defines
satisfaction as “the consumer senses that consumption fulfils some need, desire, goal, or so
forth and that this fulfilment is pleasurable” (p. 34). When the customers perceive that the
performance of the product or service is higher than their expectation, they are satisfied.
The literature suggests that the product and service purchased affect customer satisfaction
(Liu et al., 2017; Ryu & Han, 2009; Suhartanto et al., 2018). In the online context, studies
suggest that e-satisfaction influences e-loyalty (Anderson & Srinivasan, 2003; Pee et al.,
2018). Satisfied customers with their food consumption may intend to repurchase the food
in the future, endorse the OFD services to other potential customers, and voice positive
remarks about the OFD services. In contrast, customers who are dissatisfied with their
OFD services are less likely to repurchase or recommend the services to others. This
discussion implies that in the OFD service industry, customer satisfaction mediates the
relationship between e-service quality as well as food quality on online loyalty.

H6: The relationship between e-service quality and loyalty toward OFD service is
mediated by customer satisfaction

H7: The relationship between food quality and loyalty to OFD service is mediated by
customer satisfaction

Research method
Scale measurement
Although studies in e-service quality are abundant; none of the identified studies are set in
the OFD context. Therefore, the measurement items for assessing the e-service quality
variable (Table 1) are developed with reference to the existing studies.
Past studies show that the dimension of e-service quality varies; thus, it is necessary to
examine the dimensionality of e-service quality as applied in this study. The dimensionality of
e-service quality was assessed by using factor analysis. A factor analysis uses the extraction
method of principal component resulting in two factors, covering 69% of Eigen value and the
loading factor range from 0.723 to 0.838. However, the loading values of all items are well
loaded into factor 1 and only a minor value to factor 2. Further assessment using rotation
methods results in a similar number of factors and their loadings, signifying that the e-service
quality dimension is single. The factor analysis shows that Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)
measurement of the adequacy of sampling value is 0.993 and Barlett’s test of Spericity is
significant at p < .05, indicating that the results of the factor analysis test is robust. The single
construct for measuring e-service quality is consistent with Harris and Goode (2004) study in
the online retail sector. Further, the items used are consistent with the elements of efficiency,
privacy, fulfillment, and system availability proposed in Parasuraman et al. (2005)’ ES-QUAL
model.
Following past studies (Ha & Jang, 2010; Namkung & Jang, 2007), this study treats food
quality as a single dimension, consisting of variety, taste, attractiveness, and healthiness as
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 87

Table 1. E-service quality item and sources.

# Item Source
1 In the web, I can find easily what (Caruana & Ewing, 2010; Jeon & Jeong, 2017; Kedah et al., 2015; Kim et al.,
I need 2009; Parasuraman et al., 2005; Srinivasan et al., 2002)
2 The web makes it easy to get
anything
3 The web is uncomplicated to
operate
4 Whenever I need the web always
available
5 The web launches straight away
6 The delivering order is as
promised
7 The items ordered is sent out
promptly
8 The web offering is honest
9 The web accurately inform the
delivery promise
10 The web keeps my shopping
behavior information
11 My personal information is not
shared by the web
12 My payment ID is safe with the
web

indicators. Thus, the exploratory factor analysis was not conducted to assess its dimension.
Perceived value is measured with three items: reasonable price, overall convenience of website
use, and cost and benefit ratio of transaction (Anderson & Srinivasan, 2003; García-Fernández
et al., 2018). Customer satisfaction was gauged with a 5-point, “dissatisfied” to “satisfied” and
“terrible” to “pleased” (Suhartanto et al., 2018). The online loyalty is measured by intention to
repurchase, to recommend, to write positive comments on social media, and to switch to other
online providers (Caruana & Ewing, 2010; Srinivasan, Anderson, & Ponnavolu, 2002). The
measurement items for e-service quality, food quality, perceived value, and loyalty were based
on a 5-point Likert scale (1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree). To warrant that the questions
and instructions are well comprehended, the questionnaire in Indonesian language was pre-
tested on 20 OFD customers, resulting in minor adjustments to the questionnaire wordings.
There was no need for translation.

Data collection and sample

This study focuses on consumers who had an online food delivery purchase experience as the
sample. To conduct empirical research and test the proposed model (Figure 1), non-probability
sampling method was applied as the population is not known and the sampling frame is not
available. The purposive sampling is selected to collect the required data, as it can enable
researchers to gather a population representative sample. The data were collected from OFD
service customers in Bandung City during November and December 2017. The self-
administered questionnaires were distributed conveniently to customers who had purchased
food through OFD services within the last two weeks before participating in the survey. Of the
439 participants, 405 questionnaires returned were complete. Thus, the requirements of using
structural equation modeling were met, 10 respondents minimum for each survey instrument
item (Chin, Peterson, & Brown, 2008). Additionally, the requirement of a 322 sample for the level
88 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

Perceived
Value
E-Service
Quality

Customer
Loyalty

Food
Quality

Customer
Satisfaction

Established relationship, not tested

Figure 1. Conceptual model.

of confidence at 95% and ±% error margin was also fulfilled as recommended by Zikmund,
Babin, Carr, and Griffin (2013).

Data analysis
To assess the dimensionality of e-service quality, exploratory factor analysis was per-
formed as proposed by Hair, Black, Babin, and Anderson (2010). The measurement model
was examined by applying confirmatory factor analysis using variance-based Partial Least
Squares (PLS). The PLS was also used to verify the structural model and test the proposed
hypotheses. PLS enables a researcher to assess latent constructs using a small and medium
sample size and non-normality distributed data (Ali, Rasoolimanesh, Sarstedt, Ringle, &
Ryu, 2018; Chin et al., 2008). Additionally, SEM-PLS is a noted technique to estimate
coefficient paths in structural models (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2017).

Results
Table 2 indicates that the respondents are dominated by young customers (under 30 years
old) and female customers. These demographic characteristics are consistent with other
online food studies (Chang et al., 2014; Kedah et al., 2015; Kimes, 2011).

Data analysis
The data analysis was conducted into two stages. The first is intended to check the validity
and reliability of the variable constructs. To assess the construct validity, this study
assesses factor loading, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), and Composite Reliability
(CR). As shown in Table 3, all indicators of validity satisfied the recommended cut-off
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 89

Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Variable Description Frequency %
Gender Male 116 28.6
Female 289 71.4
Age 17–20 116 28.6
21–30 271 66.9
31–40 11 2.7
Over 40 7 1.7
Occupation Student 10 2.5
University student 306 76
Worker 82 20
Housewife 2 0.5
Others 5 1.2
Average purchasing frequency </month 236 58
3–5/month 134 33
>/month 35 8.6
Last order food delivery GoFood 337 83
GrabFood 13 3.2
Restaurant WEB 55 14

Table 3. Loading of the item measurement model, CR, and AVE.

Loading Cronbach CR AVE
E-Service quality 0.941 0.949 0.607
-In the web, I can find easily what I need 0.735
-The web makes it easy to get anything 0.737
-The web is uncomplicated to operate 0.784
-Whenever I need the web always available 0.737
-The web launches straight away 0.747
-The delivering order is as promised 0.790
-The items ordered is send out promptly 0.831
-The web offering is honest 0.768
-The web accurately inform the delivery promise 0.838
-The web keeps my shopping behavior information 0.811
-My personal information does not shared by the web 0.803
-The payment ID is safe with the web 0.759
Food quality 0.771 0.853 0.592
-Presentation 0.733
-Variety 0.791
-Taste 0.828
-Healthy option 0.721
Perceived value 0.841 0.904 0.758
-Offer reasonable price 0.854
-Cost–benefit ratio 0.873
-Overall convenience of the web 0.884
Satisfaction 0.900 0.952 0.909
-Dissatisfied to satisfied 0.950
-Terrible to pleased 0.956
Loyalty 0.697 0.803 0.509
-Continue to purchase 0.691
-Intention to recommend 0.837
-Intention to say positive thing 0.704
-Continue purchase even the price increase 0.602

value, factors loading of more than 0.6, CR of more than 0.7, and AVE of more than 0.5
(Chin et al., 2008; Hair et al., 2010).
To assess the discriminant validity, Henseler, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2015) recommend
Heterotrait-Monotrait method to judge the construct’s discriminant validity with cut-off
value of not more than 0.9. Using this recommendation, the discriminant validity of the
90 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

constructs tested is satisfied as all Heterotrait-Monotrait values are less than 0.9.These
values suggest that the discriminant validity between the variable constructs is satisfied.

Structural model
Following the measurement model, the second stage of the data analysis process was
evaluating the structural model and testing the hypotheses developed. For these purposes,
this study applies SmartPLS. The path coefficients assessment, as Chin et al. (2008)
recommend, was conducted by using a bootstrapping procedure with 5,000 iterations.
Following Tenenhaus, Vinzi, Chatelin, and Lauro (2005) suggestion, this study uses the
Goodness-of-Fit (GoF) index to gauge the model fit. The GoF assessment result shows that
the model tested has a value of 0.677, suggesting that the fitness of the model is good.
Further, to check the approximate fit indices, normal fit index (NFI) and standardized
root mean square residual (SRMR) were applied. The results show that SRMR has a value
of 0.067 (lower than the suggested value of 0.8) and NFI has a value of 0.905 (larger that
the suggested level of 0.9) demonstrating the model fitness (Hair et al., 2017).
Succeeding the GoF analysis, the hypothesized relationships were tested and the
results are presented in Table 4. The predictor explanatory power of the respective
constructs is indicated by the corrected R2s. Figure 2 shows the e-service quality
predicts 37.1% (R2: 0.371) food quality. Both e-service quality and food quality explain
51.4% (R2: 0.514) of perceived value and 52.5% (R2: 0.525) of satisfaction. While all
loyalty predictors (e-service quality, food quality, perceived value, and satisfaction)
predict 39.2% (R2: 0.392) of customer loyalty. As the range of R2 is between 0.33 and
0.67, the model validity of this study can be classified as between moderate and
substantial (Chin et al., 2008).
Besides the R2 value, scholars (Ali et al., 2018; Chin et al., 2008) maintain that
researchers should use predictive sample reuse Q2 to identify the effectiveness of predictive
relevance. Q2 indicates how well the data can be reassembled by employing the PLS
parameters and the proposed model. Based on the procedure of blindfolding, the result
of data analysis shows that the predictive relevance (Q2) for endogenous variables is
acceptable as their values are positive (Hair et al., 2017). The significant test on the
relationships amongst the variables tested shows that hypothesis H1 is not supported;
while hypothesis H2 and H3 are supported.

Table 4. Structural estimates.

Direct Indirect Total effect
Path Β t-value β t-value β t-value
E-service quality ≤ loyalty 0.031 0.545 0.428 8.511** 0.459 8.010**
Food quality ≤ 0.256 4.146** 0.179 5.102** 0.435 7.428**
E-service quality ≤ quality 0.609 11.714** – - 0.609 11.714**
E-service quality ≤ value 0.335 5.070** 0.281 7.547** 0.616 10.522**
E-service quality ≤ 0.304 4.449** 0.325 6.283** 0.629 12.156**
Food quality ≤ value 0.462 8.220** – - 0.462 8.220**
Food quality ≤ 0.230 4.088** 0.139 4.693** 0.369 6.275**
Perceived value ≤ 0.300 5.131** – - 0.300 5.131**
Perceived value ≤ 0.197 3.007** 0.072 2.727** 0.269 4.729**
Satisfaction ≤ 0.240 3.700** – - 0.240 3.700**
**significant at p < .01
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 91

Perceived
Value
(R²: 0.514)
0.335*
E-Service
Quality 0.197*

ns
0.462* Customer
0.609* Loyalty
0.300* (R²: 0.392)
0.230**
0.256*
Food
Quality 0.240*
(R²: 0.371)
0.272** Customer
Satisfaction
(R²: 0.525)

ns: Not significant; **significant at p<0.01

Figure 2. The result of tested model.

In addition to setting out the direct effect, Table 4 also shows the indirect and total
effect of the variables tested. It reveals that although the direct effect of e-service
quality on loyalty is not significant, its total effect is significant. This finding suggests
that the e-service quality’s effect on loyalty is through strengthening food quality,
perceived value, and customer satisfaction. While the food quality, besides directly
impacting on customer loyalty, indirectly impacts on loyalty through reinforcing
perceived value and customer satisfaction. Further, Table 4 shows that, although the
direct effect of food quality on loyalty is much higher than the effect of e-service
quality, their total effect on online loyalty is only slightly different, 0.459 (e-service
quality) and 0.435 (food quality). The direct relationships between the tested variables
are depicted in Figure 2.

Mediation test
To test the mediation role of satisfaction and perceived value (H4–H7), scholars (Baron &
Kenny, 1986; Nitzl, Roldan, & Cepeda, 2016) recommendation was followed.
A comparison between path coefficient value of two different models with and without
the mediation variable (satisfaction and perceived value) was conducted. Testing the first
model between e-service quality and online loyalty without the perceived value mediation
results in a β of 0.445 (significant at p < .01). Testing the similar model but with the
mediation of perceived value results a β of 0.321 (significant at p < .05). To test
significance of the mediation, the Sobel test statistics was applied resulting in
92 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

a significant value (p < .01). The reducing of the coefficient implies that the mediation is
partial. The mediation test of perceived value on the link between food quality and online
loyalty has β value of 0.434 (without the mediation) and β value of 0.311 (with the
mediation). Testing the Sobel test results in a significant value (p < .01), suggesting that
the mediation role is also partial. Therefore, the support for hypotheses H4 and H5 is
partial.
A similar procedure was applied to assess the hypothesis on the mediation of perceived
value on the link between e-service quality and online loyalty. Testing the first relationship
model between e-service quality and loyalty without the satisfaction mediation results in
a β of 0.364 (significant at p < .01). Testing the similar model but with the mediation of
satisfaction results in a β of 0.345 (significant at p < .05). To test the mediation role, the
Sobel test was applied, resulting in a significant value (p < .01). The reduction of the
coefficient between e-service quality and online loyalty due to the existence of the
mediator implies that customer satisfaction partially mediates the relationship (Nitzl
et al., 2016). Checking the satisfaction mediation role on the link between food quality
and online loyalty has a β of 0.342 (without the mediation) and 0.234 (with the media-
tion). The Sobel test results in a significant value (p < .01), suggesting that the mediation
role is also partial. Therefore, H6 and H7 are partially supported.

Discussion
Despite the flourishing demand of food through online delivery services, the manner in
which food quality and e-service quality influence loyalty toward OFD service has been
ignored. This study represents the first effort to scrutinize the consequences of both food
quality and e-service quality on customer post-purchase behavior in the OFD service
environment. This study reveals several important points.
First, this study shows the importance of food quality in influencing customer loyalty
toward the OFD service. Further, the result of this study suggests that the consequence of
the quality of food on online loyalty is partly intermediated by both satisfaction and
perceived value. The food quality influence on online loyalty is through strengthening the
customer’s perceived values as well as the customer level of satisfaction. This result
validates Chang et al. (2014) study in online group buying which reports that food’s
quality affects consumers buying food via online. Further, this study corroborates with
past studies in the restaurant setting, that food quality is an imperative determinant of
customer loyalty (Mattila, 2001; Namkung & Jang, 2007; Ryu & Han, 2009). When the
food is of high quality, customers tend to repurchase and recommend the food in the
future. This is also reflected in their behavior of continuously consuming the food. This
finding implies that food quality is a fundamental component, not only in a conventional
restaurant context but also in the context of OFD services. Therefore, it is important that
the casual dining and fast-food restaurants offering OFD service provide high-quality
foods that not only match with customer needs but are also superior to the competitors’
foods. To outperform competitors, they should concentrate on food presentation, taste,
variety, and healthiness.
Second, in terms of e-service quality, this study reveals that this service is essential in
determining food quality, perceived value, and satisfaction, but contrary to past studies in
online retail as well as in the restaurant (Ha & Jang, 2010; Kim et al., 2009), it has an
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 93

insignificant direct effect on customer loyalty. However, looking at the total effect of
e-service quality (direct effect and indirect effect through food quality, perceived value,
and satisfaction) on loyalty, this factor has a considerable total effect on customer loyalty.
This result implies that e-service quality not only strengthens food quality but also
reinforces perceived value as well as customer satisfaction which subsequently create
online loyalty. This finding means that high e-service quality per se does not encourage
an OFD customers’ loyalty. The explanation of this finding is that the food, not the
service, is the main purpose of customers using OFD service. Although e-service quality is
not the object that fulfills customer’s need, it will impact the perception of food quality,
resulting in a high perceived value and satisfaction which ultimately creates customer
loyalty toward the OFD service. Because online food order is self-service (Kimes, 2011),
a well-designed self-service ordering system through online devices is crucial in creating
satisfaction, perceived value, and continuing online loyalty.
Third, the total effect of both e-quality and food quality shows that the overall impact of
both qualities on loyalty toward OFD services is comparable. This result suggests that, in
general, food quality and e-service quality are equally important determinants of customer
loyalty. This result is different from a past study (Ha & Jang, 2010) which reports that
compared to other restaurant elements such as service quality and restaurant environ-
ment, the quality of food is the dominant factor in influencing customer experience
toward the restaurant. This finding suggests that in developing customer loyalty, the
OFD service providers must emphasize both factors, rather than only focusing on either
e-service or the food quality itself. This finding suggests that both e-service and food are
not only important components in a full service restaurant (Namkung & Jang, 2007) but
also important for restaurants offering OFD services. This finding is important as none of
past studies have reported this issue. From a theoretical perspective, the fitness of the OFD
service model tested in this study extends the existing knowledge (Han & Hyun, 2017;
Wirtz & Lovelock, 2016) that quality (product, service, and e-service), perceived value, and
satisfaction are the building blocks of online loyalty in the OFD context.
Last, this study reveals an important finding in terms of the link between e-service
quality and food quality, which suggests that e-service quality influences food quality. This
result is consistent with the service process. In the OFD services, although food is the
fundamental element to satisfy customer need, the process of consuming the food starts
from when the customers search and order food from the firm website or application.
Therefore, the customer experience with the web quality will influence customer percep-
tion of the food quality. This finding is consistent with the study in conventional restau-
rant (Namkung & Jang, 2007; Ryu & Han, 2009) that concludes that the manner of service
delivery will influence the customer experience with the food. From conceptual perspec-
tive, this significant link between e-service quality and food quality provides a new
understanding by supporting the spillover theory in the hospitality industry (Kim et al.,
2018; Sthapit & Björk, 2017), more specifically in the OFD services environment.

Managerial implication
First, the e-service quality element in determining customer loyalty toward OFD services
provide avenue managers of casual dining and fast-food restaurants offering delivery
services an impetus to improve their business performance. This study suggests that
94 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

having an excellent e-service quality is essential. In the online environment, food, like
other products presented through online media, is not tangible. Unlike the traditional
restaurant, consumers in the OFD services cannot taste, touch, smell, and see the food
offered. Rather, consumers assess the food quality by relying on the picture and the given
description of the foods or services in the web page. Hence, to maximize the degree of
trust of the customers, clear and understandable information should be provided in the
website. Moreover, comprehensive information with reasonable explanations should be
given such as the width and depth of the food and service offerings. In addition, to assist
the customer to visualize the offer, demonstration of virtual food or service is also
necessary to encourage customers to make the right decisions.
Next, the result of this study highlights the importance of food quality in determining
customer loyalty toward OFD services. This result highlights that quality of food needs to get
full attention from the managers of casual dining and fast-food restaurant offering delivery
services. However, food quality indicated by its attractiveness, taste, variety, and healthiness is
considered a basic element that every restaurant has to offer. To compete in this competitive
market, restaurant managers must not only provide high food quality, but also need to
constantly innovate their food to cope with their customers’ ever-changing demand. As
people tend to like tradition and local flavor, offering quality innovative food with local tastes
and developed based on local ingredients could help the restaurant to retain their existing
customers as well as attracting potential and new customers. Thus, it is imperative for
restaurant managers to train the kitchen staff to prepare delicious, nutritious, and attractively
presented food with local taste and using local food ingredients.
Last, for small and medium casual dining and fast-food restaurants that do not have their
own delivery service as well as the delivery service firms, this study provides useful guidance
to improve their business. For the restaurateurs whose food is influenced by e-service quality,
this study suggests that to improve their business, they need to select and cooperate with
delivery service firms that are excellent in delivering services. Selecting the delivery service
firms that have a favorable reputation will help to create a high e-service quality in the
customer perception. Similarly, food delivery firms, such as GoFood and GrabFood, need to
select restaurants that can provide consistently excellent food quality. The failure to have
excellent food restaurant supplier will damage customer loyalty toward OFD services.

Limitations and options for future research

Although contributing significantly in extending our understanding on the determinants
of loyalty toward OFD services, this study bears some drawbacks. First, data for this study
were gathered from OFD customers in Bandung, Indonesia, limiting the generalization of
the findings. This issue can be solved by replicating this study in different regions. Second,
in addition to the loyalty determinants used in this study, identifying other elements of
loyalty formation is also critically needed. To develop a robust model, a future study could
incorporate other constructs such as image, trust, and involvement, including sociodemo-
graphic factors which potentially affect satisfaction and loyalty toward OFD service. Third,
the OFD loyalty model tested in this study assumes the causal effect of the variables tested,
in particular satisfaction and loyalty toward OFD services. The results of causal-effect test
reported in this study should be taken with caution as the data are collected using cross-
sectional method, making this study neither experimental nor longitudinal. Although the
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 95

hypothesized relationships between the variables can be examined using PLS, the causal-
effect relationships suggested in the model might not signify the factual causal association
between the variables. The future studies could use longitudinal data to more accurately
represent the relationship changes across a period of time.

References
Abou-Shouk, M. A., & Khalifa, G. S. (2017). The influence of website quality dimensions on
e-purchasing behaviour and e-loyalty: A comparative study of Egyptian travel agents and hotels.
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 34(5), 608–623. doi:10.1080/10548408.2016.1209151
Ali, F., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Ryu, K. (2018). An assessment of the use of
partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in hospitality research. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(1), 514–538. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-10-2016-0568
Anderson, R. E., & Srinivasan, S. S. (2003). E-satisfaction and E-loyalty: A contingency framework.
Psychology and Marketing, 20(2), 123–138. doi:10.1002/mar.10063
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Bressolles, G., Durrieu, F., & Senecal, S. (2014). A consumer typology based on e-service quality and
e-satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(6), 889–896. doi:10.1016/j.
jretconser.2014.07.004
Caruana, A., & Ewing, M. T. (2010). How corporate reputation, quality, and value influence online
loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 63(9), 1103–1110. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.04.030
Chang, H. H., Wang, Y.-H., & Yang, W.-Y. (2009). The impact of e-service quality, customer
satisfaction and loyalty on e-marketing: Moderating effect of perceived value. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 20(4), 423–443. doi:10.1080/14783360902781923
Chang, S.-C., Chou, P.-Y., & Lo, W.-C. (2014). Evaluation of satisfaction and repurchase intention
in online food group-buying, using Taiwan as an example. British Food Journal, 116(1), 44–61.
doi:10.1108/BFJ-03-2012-0058
Chin, W. W., Peterson, R. A., & Brown, S. P. (2008). Structural equation modeling in marketing:
Some practical reminders. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 16(4), 287–298. doi:10.2753/
MTP1069-6679160402
Fandos, C., & Flavián, C. (2006). Intrinsic and extrinsic quality attributes, loyalty and buying
intention: An analysis for a PDO product. British Food Journal, 108(8), 646–662. doi:10.1108/
00070700610682337
García-Fernández, J., Gálvez-Ruíz, P., Fernández-Gavira, J., Vélez-Colón, L., Pitts, B., & Bernal-
García, A. (2018). The effects of service convenience and perceived quality on perceived value,
satisfaction and loyalty in low-cost fitness centers. Sport Management Review, 21(3), 250–262.
doi:10.1016/j.smr.2017.07.003
Gursoy, D., Chen, J. S., & Chi, C. G. (2014). Theoretical examination of destination loyalty
formation. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(5), 809–827.
doi:10.1108/IJCHM-12-2013-0539
Ha, J., & Jang, S. (2010). Effects of service quality and food quality: The moderating role of
atmospherics in an ethnic restaurant segment. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 29(3), 520–529. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.12.005
Hair, J. E., Hult, G. T., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2 ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global
perspective (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.
Han, H., & Hyun, S. S. (2017). Impact of hotel-restaurant image and quality of
physical-environment, service, and food on satisfaction and intention. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 63, 82–92. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.03.006
96 D. SUHARTANTO ET AL.

Harris, L. C., & Goode, M. M. (2004). The four levels of loyalty and the pivotal role of trust: A study
of online service dynamics. Journal of Retailing, 80(2), 139. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2004.04.002
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity
in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43
(1), 115–135. doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Jeon, M. M., & Jeong, M. (2017). Customers’ perceived website service quality and its effects on
e-loyalty. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(1), 438–457.
doi:10.1108/IJCHM-02-2015-0054
Kedah, Z., Ismail, Y., Haque, A., & Ahmed, S. (2015). Key success factors of online food ordering
services: An empirical study. Malaysian Management Review, 50(2), 19–36.
Kim, H., Woo, E., Uysal, M., & Kwon, N. (2018). The effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR)
on employee well-being in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 30(3), 1584–1600. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-03-2016-0166
Kim, J., Jin, B., & Swinney, J. L. (2009). The role of etail quality, e-satisfaction and e-trust in online
loyalty development process. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16(4), 239–247.
doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2008.11.019
Kimes, S. E. (2011). Customer perceptions of electronic food ordering. Cornell Hospitality Report, 11
(10), 6–15.
Liu, W.-K., Lee, Y.-S., & Hung, L.-M. (2017). The interrelationships among service quality,
customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty: Examination of the fast-food industry. Journal of
Foodservice Business Research, 20(2), 146–162. doi:10.1080/15378020.2016.1201644
Mattila, A. S. (2001). Emotional bonding and restaurant loyalty. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 42(6), 73–79. doi:10.1016/S0010-8804(01)81012-0
Mihajlović, N. (2017). The analysis of Serbian customers satisfaction with e-services quality dimen-
sions of lodging e-intermediaries. The European Journal of Applied Economics, 14(1), 48.
doi:10.5937/ejae14-13242
Namkung, Y., & Jang, S. (2007). Does food quality really matter in restaurants? Its impact on
customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 31(3),
387–409. doi:10.1177/1096348007299924
Ng, S.-R., Wong, S.-Y., & Chong, L. (2017). Outsourcing to online food delivery services:
Perspective of F&B business owners. Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce, 22(2), 1–13.
Nitzl, C., Roldan, J. L., & Cepeda, G. (2016). Mediation analysis in partial least squares path
modeling: Helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Industrial Management &
Data Systems, 116(9), 1849–1864. doi:10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302
Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63, 33–44. doi:10.2307/
1252099
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). E-S-QUAL: A multiple-item scale for
assessing electronic service quality. Journal of Service Research, 7(3), 213–233. doi:10.1177/
1094670504271156
Pee, L., Jiang, J., & Klein, G. (2018). E-store loyalty: Longitudinal comparison of website usefulness
and satisfaction. International Journal of Market Research, January, 12, 1–17. doi:10.1177/
1470785317752045
Reichheld, F. F., Markey, R. G., & Hopton, C. (2000). The loyalty effect—the relationship between
loyalty and profits. European Business Journal, 12(3), 134.
Ryu, K., & Han, H. (2009). Influence of the quality of food, service, and physical environment on
customer satisfaction and behavioral intention in quick-casual restaurants: moderating role of
perceived price. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 34(3), 310–329. doi:10.1177/
1096348009350624
Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P., & Lee, D.-J. (2001). A new measure of quality of work life (QWL)
based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Social Indicators Research, 55(3), 241–302.
doi:10.1023/A:1010986923468
Srinivasan, S. S., Anderson, R., & Ponnavolu, K. (2002). Customer loyalty in e-commerce: An
exploration of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Retailing, 78(1), 41–50. doi:10.1016/
S0022-4359(01)00065-3
 JOURNAL OF FOODSERVICE BUSINESS RESEARCH 97

Statista. (2018). Food Delivery Worldwide Retrieved January 20th, 2018 https://www.statista.com/
outlook/374/100/food-delivery/worldwide
Sthapit, E., & Björk, P. (2017). Activity participation home and away – Examining the spillover
theory among families on holiday. Anatolia, 28(2), 209–223. doi:10.1080/13032917.2017.1311272
Suhartanto, D., Brien, A., Sumarjan, N., & Wibisono, N. (2018). Examining attraction loyalty
formation in creative tourism. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 10(2),
163–175. doi:10.1108/IJQSS-08-2017-0068
Suhartanto, D., Chen, B. T., Mohi, Z., & Sosianika, A. (2018). Exploring loyalty to specialty foods among
tourists and residents. British Food Journal, 120(5), 1120–1131. doi:10.1108/BFJ-09-2017-0485
Sulek, J. M., & Hensley, R. L. (2004). The relative importance of food, atmosphere, and fairness of
wait: the case of a full-service restaurant. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,
45(3), 235–247. doi:10.1177/0010880404265345
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y.-M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling.
Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159–205. doi:10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005
Wirtz, J., & Lovelock, C. (2016). Services marketing—people, technology, strategy (8th ed.). US:
World Scientific Publishing.
Yeo, V. C. S., Goh, S.-K., & Rezaei, S. (2017). Consumer experiences, attitude and behavioural
intention toward online food delivery (OFD) services. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
35, 150–162. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.12.013
Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Malhotra, A. (2002). Service quality delivery through web sites:
A critical review of extant knowledge. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(4), 362.
doi:10.1177/009207002236911
Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., & Griffin, M. (2013). Business research methods (9th ed.).
Mason, OH: South-Western, Chengage.